Category: Corona Virus Vaccine

The page you requested was not found. You may have followed an old link or typed the address incorrectly.

We've also been doing some house cleaning so the page may have been moved or removed.

Please try searching for what you are looking for or you could go to the home page and start from there. Or you may be interested in today's top stories.

Read the original post:

Up Close with Bill Ritter: COVID-19 lockdown 4th anniversary and the lessons learned - WABC-TV

The following is a summary of Questionnaire-based study of COVID-19 vaccination induced headache: evidence of clusters of adverse events, published in the March 2024 issue of Neurology by Zhou et al.

Headaches are frequent after Pfizers COVID-19 vaccine, ranking #3 in reported side effects. This study explores their link to other issues after vaccination.

Researchers started a retrospective study investigating the potential association between headaches, COVID-19 vaccination, and other adverse events.

They undertook a study based on a questionnaire survey involving 1,402 healthcare workers. The study centered around 5 questions, incorporating 12 AEs and headaches reported after the initial and subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations. Participants rated severity using a scale of Not at all (N), Little (L), Average (A), Quite (Q), and Very (V). The Bowker test was utilized to compare headache severity between vaccinations on a 5-point Likert scale. Ordinal logistic regression was employed to examine the association between headache severity (dependent variable) and the ratings of the 12 AEs (independent variable). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis was conducted to assess the predictive value of AE ratings for headache severity.

The results showed that participants reported increased severity of headaches following the second vaccination. Headache symptoms were associated with fatigue, flu-like symptoms, pain at the injection site, a known tension-type headache, fever, dizziness/balance problems, and a known migraine.

Investigators concluded that clusters of headache-associated adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, suggesting potential shared mechanisms underlying these co-occurring effects.

Source: bmcneurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12883-024-03583-6

See the rest here:

COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Headache: Clusters and Adverse Events Study - Physician's Weekly

This article has been reviewed according to ScienceX's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

proofread

close

New research published in Nature Human Behavior suggests that text nudges encouraging people to get the COVID-19 vaccine, which had proven effective in prior real-world field tests, are also effective at prompting people to get a booster.

The key in both cases is to include in the text a sense of ownership in the dose awaiting them.

The paper, led by Hengchen Dai, an associate professor of management and organizations and behavioral decision making at the UCLA Anderson School of Management, and Silvia Saccardo, an associate professor of social and decision sciences at Carnegie Mellon University, draws on previous research published in Nature that examined the effectiveness of different types of text messages encouraging patients to get a COVID-19 vaccine.

That research revealed that a text message implying a hint of ownership, with a note to "Claim your dose by making a vaccination appointment," was more effective than a text that merely included a link to an online vaccination scheduling tool.

The new paper focuses on a potential schism between what people in a hypothetical scenario say they will do, and what they actually do. The researchers found that adding that sense of ownership to the booster dose was more effective than research dependent on hypothetical scenarios or expert predictions.

"Given the importance of reproducibility to the field of behavioral science, numerous studies have focused on replication attempts of laboratory findings, but replications in the field have been infrequent," Dai said. "We take a stride in this direction by assessing the transferability of insights gained in one field context to another, and from hypothetical and prediction surveys to field settings."

The researchers texted more than 300,000 patients in the UCLA Health system with one of 14 messages that prior field tests, lab research or expert surveys suggested might encourage recipients to get the booster shot. A control group did not receive a text message.

They found that adding a note to play up the psychological sense of ownership ("claim your dose") turned out to be more effective than if the reminder simply told patients the booster was available, as shown in Dai and Saccardo's previous field test. All other nudges added on top of a text reminder were ineffective in moving the needle.

Some messages leveraged the consistency principle in the form of "You have completed a COVID-19 vaccine primary series. Great job protecting your health." One message was worded as an appeal explaining that the booster was different than the original vaccine and specifically designed to combat the most recent strain of COVID-19. Another cited the ongoing severity of the virus.

Other messages reminded people that they could get the flu shot at the same time as the COVID-19 boostera strategy used by pharmacies like CVS and Walgreens. The messages with additional content performed no better than simple text reminders.

Although the researchers note that their findings are limited to the field of COVID-19 booster vaccinations, they point out that their work raises questions about the efficacy of research built on hypotheticals or theoretical assumptions.

"While hypothetical surveys and self-reports are undoubtedly valuable for providing foundational evidence on the mechanisms of human behavior, our findings suggest that they may not always translate to complex real-world situations where various factors can affect behavior," Saccardo said. "It is critical to accumulate knowledge about the impact of interventions in the real world."

Study co-authors are Dr. Maria Han, Sitaram Vangala, Juyea Hoo and Dr. Jeffrey Fujimoto of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA.

More information: Silvia Saccardo et al, Field testing the transferability of behavioural science knowledge on promoting vaccinations, Nature Human Behaviour (2024). DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01813-4

The rest is here:

Text nudges can increase uptake of COVID-19 boostersif they play up a sense of ownership of the vaccine - Medical Xpress

The origins of COVID-19 are the subject of ongoing scientific inquiry and a key aspect of global scientific efforts. Current research supports the hypothesis of a natural origin, including sampling, epidemiology, viral evolution, and genomic epidemiology. This conclusion is based on the observed interaction patterns between animals and humans and the known mutation and evolution behavior of COVID-19.

Saskia Popescu, PhD, MPH, MA, FAPIC, is an epidemiologist and Fellow of the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (FAPIC), specializing in infection prevention and public health.

"The conversation on COVID origins is very complex, says Popescu. I like to recognize that we are never going to get that level of evidence that people want. But overwhelmingly we do see from an epidemiological perspective, from genomic sampling and surveillance, and just from our knowledge of coronaviruses, and zoonotic diseases, that that's likely the origin of this."

Emphasis on epidemiological perspectives, genomic sampling, and understanding of zoonotic diseases supports considering natural zoonotic spillover as a source of the outbreak. Acknowledging challenges in pinpointing the exact moment or mechanism of transmission from animals to humans suggests accepting current evidence limits and steering the conversation towards implications for zoonotic disease prevention, lab safety, and future pandemic preparedness.

"From an outbreak perspective, we need to know the source so we can prevent it in the future, says Popescu. If you look at the likelihood that it is a zoonotic spillover event, then we can focus on addressing that from a One Health perspective, we can look at increasing biosurveillance, we can look at the risks from deforestation and climate change that are increasing, you know, animal habitats changing and our interactions with animals."

It suggests that focusing on the virus's likely zoonotic nature guides preventive measures and promotes a view of pandemic preparedness. It sees the discussion as a chance to improve global health security through better collaboration and information exchange.

Long COVID serves as an example of how infectious diseases extend beyond the initial infection, affecting individuals' health and well-being long after recovery from the acute phase, Popescu states These illnesses cause chronic issues that require us to pay attention to them to prevent these outbreaks but also to study the chronic conditions and the long-related issues as a result of those acute infections.

Framing the origins of COVID-19 within the broader context of chronic disease and long-term health impacts encourages a reevaluation of societal preparations, responses, and recoveries from infectious disease outbreaks. Investing in healthcare systems, research, and policies supporting ongoing population health needs, highlighting the interconnectedness of immediate outbreak response and long-term public health strategies.

Overall, Popescu emphasizes understanding COVID-19's origins emphasizes the need for global public health readiness and collaboration. Strengthening healthcare infrastructure, research, and policies for comprehensive health support is critical. This approach, focusing on prevention, surveillance, and addressing health disparities, highlights the importance of a united global effort to enhance health security and prepare for future health challenges.

Continue reading here:

Navigating the Complexities of COVID-19's Origins - Contagionlive.com

From Camden and Cherry Hill to Trenton and the Jersey Shore, what about life in New Jersey do you want WHYY News to cover? Let us know.

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy said a task force will be set up to implement the recommendations made in a review of the states response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Recommendations in the $9 million report, which was released Monday, included documenting existing pandemic plans immediately, making specific investments to reduce health disparities across the state and increasing the readiness and resiliency of the hospital system in an emergency.

During WHYYs Ask Governor Murphy program on Wednesday, the governor said the panel will likely continue working through the list until his last day in office.

Its gonna take us a while to chop through all of these recommendations, he said. The public health infrastructure is a huge lift financially and otherwise. Preparedness tabletop exercises, making sure that when you change administrations, theres x number of days dedicated between Election Day and inauguration to exercises and prepping for this.

Read the original post:

N.J. task force will be formed to implement recommendations from COVID response review - WHYY

Healthy volunteers are to be deliberately infected with diseases including Covid-19 in a bid to develop nasal spray vaccines that block the spread of coronaviruses.

The 44 million programme, led by Imperial College London, aims to develop next-generation vaccines that not only reduce disease severity, but also stop people from catching a virus in the first place.

Vaccines that can stop transmission of a virus are crucial to being able to end pandemics and epidemics swiftly, said Dr Richard Hatchett, the chief executive of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (Cepi), which is co-funding the five-year project.

If we find a way to [block transmission] ... with the next generation of Covid-19 vaccines, for example, we could then dramatically reduce the circulation of the Sars-Cov-2 virus and hence limit its ability to generate dangerous new variants, he added.

Experts believe that inhaling a vaccine directly into the nose and lungs, rather than via an injection into muscle tissue, could be the key to triggering mucosal immunity the type of protection that is believed to block infections.

Coronaviruses typically infect people through cells lining their nose, throat and lungs, said Chris Chiu, a professor of Infectious Diseases at Imperial and principal investigator for the project called MusiCC.

Mucosal immunity generated at these surfaces is highly specialised Since they directly act in the place that viruses enter and exit the body, they could be the key to developing vaccines that can block viruses from being able to spread from one person to another.

The global project is also significant because it will be based on human challenge trials.

Prof Danny Altman, a professor of immunology at Imperial, told the Telegraph the programme is unique because of the sheer momentum of human challenge studies, at scale, coming stage centre.

These medical studies intentionally infect individuals with a particular disease, to test whether vaccines or drugs work. They also give scientists unique opportunities to track how an illness develops, including the relationship between a virus and the human immune system.

While they have been used for decades to better understand diseases such as malaria, flu, typhoid and cholera, there are tight regulations on when and how they can be deployed.

But last year, Imperial announced that the worlds first Covid-19 human challenge trial was safe in 36 young adults, laying the groundwork for their use more broadly. Now, the consortium will develop a trial that can be used concurrently in multiple sites worldwide.

MusiCC will test the potential of several nasal spray vaccines against betacoronaviruses the pathogen family that includes Sars-Cov-2, Mers and several seasonal common cold viruses. Trials will take place across several sites, each involving small groups of young, healthy volunteers.

This is highly significant considering that one of the major hurdles in the vaccine campaign against Covid was the failure in inducing mucosal immunity, Prof Linfa Wang, from the Programme in Emerging Infectious Diseases at Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore, which is part of the consortium, told The Telegraph.

This model will also be highly important for other viruses of pandemic potential.

Protect yourself and your family by learning more about Global Health Security

See the original post here:

Healthy humans will be deliberately infected with Covid in bid to develop nasal spray vaccine - The Telegraph

This article has been reviewed according to ScienceX's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

proofread

close

The risk of cardiac and clot-related complications following COVID-19 is substantially reduced in people who receive the COVID-19 vaccination compared with unvaccinated individuals, reports an observational study published online in the journal Heart.

Led by Professor Daniel Prieto Alhambra the study found that COVID-19 vaccines proved to be highly effective in reducing the severity of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospital admission and death.

And while some COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of rare but serious complications, such as blood clots and heart inflammation (myocarditis), the risk of these complications was substantially higher after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Nuria Mercade Besora, Research Assistant in Health Data Sciences at NDORMS and first author of the paper said, "Our findings probably reflect the fact that the vaccines are effective in reducing infection, and minimize the risk of severe COVID-19. These results could encourage COVID-19 vaccination among hesitant people who are worried about the potential risk of vaccine side effects."

The study set out to explore the association between COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic complications using population data for the U.K., Spain and Estonia which included 10.17 million vaccinated people and 10.39 million unvaccinated people.

Individuals who were vaccinated received either an adenovirus-based vaccine (Oxford/AstraZeneca or Janssen) or one of the mRNA vaccines (BioNTech/Pfizer or Moderna) and recorded them according to four post-infection time windows: 030, 3190, 91180 and 181365 days after infection.

A range of potentially influential factors, such as age, sex and pre-existing conditions including chronic lung disease, diabetes, heart disease and a history of blood clots were accounted for in the analysis to minimize bias.

The results show that COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reduced risks of heart failure, venous thromboembolism (clot within the veins of a limb) and arterial thrombosis/thromboembolism (blood clot in the artery) for up to a year after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Reduced risk of other complications, such as ventricular arrhythmia or cardiac arrest (heart attack), myocarditis and pericarditis were also seen, but only in the first 30 days after infection.

Compared with unvaccinated individuals, having a COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reduced risks of venous thromboembolism by 78%, arterial thrombosis/thromboembolism by 47% and heart failure by 55% in the first 30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, as time progressed the protective effects of vaccination waned.

As time progressed, the protective effects of vaccination waned, but remained at 47%, 28%, and 39% respectively at 91180 days after infection and 50%, 38%, and 48% respectively at 181365 days.

This is an observational study, so can't establish cause and effect, and the authors highlight some limitations including the inherent data quality concerns and risk of bias with use of real-world data, and potential under-reporting of post-COVID-19 complications.

However, state-of-the-art statistical methods were used to deal with these limitations and results were consistent across all databases, which they say highlights the robustness and replicability of the findings.

Nuria concluded that "The protective effects of vaccination are consistent with known reductions in disease severity, but we need to do more research to understand the effect/s of a booster vaccination in different populations."

More information: Nria Mercad-Besora et al, The role of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing post-COVID-19 thromboembolic and cardiovascular complications, Heart (2024). DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2023-323483

Journal information: Heart

See original here:

COVID jab linked to lower risk of COVID-19related clot and heart complications - Medical Xpress

The COVID-19 virus can persist in the blood and tissue of patients for more than a year after the acute phase of the illness has ended, according to new research from UC San Francisco that offers potential clues to why some people develop long COVID.

The scientists found pieces of SARS-CoV-2, referred to as COVID antigens, lingering in the blood up to 14 months after infection and for more than two years in tissue samples from people who had COVID.

These two studies provide some of the strongest evidence so far that COVID antigens can persist in some people, even though we think they have normal immune responses, said Michael Peluso, MD, an infectious disease researcher in the UCSF School of Medicine, who led both studies.

The findings were presented at the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), which was held March 3 to 6, 2024, in Denver.

Early in the pandemic, COVID-19 was thought to be a transient illness. But a growing number of patients, even those who had previously been healthy, continued having symptoms, such as, brain fog, digestive problems and vascular issues, for months or even years.

The researchers looked at blood samples from 171 people who had been infected with COVID. Using an ultra-sensitive test for the COVID spike protein, which helps the virus break into human cells, the scientists found the virus was still present up to 14 months later in some people.

Among those who were hospitalized for COVID, the likelihood of detecting the COVID antigens was about twice as high as it was for those who were not. It was also higher for those who reported being sicker but were not hospitalized.

As a clinician, these associations convince me that we are on to something, because it makes sense that someone who had been sicker with COVID would have more antigen that can stick around, Peluso said.

Since the virus is believed to persist in the tissue reservoirs, the scientists turned to UCSFs Long COVID Tissue Bank, which contains samples donated by patients with and without long COVID.

They detected portions of viral RNA for up to two years after infection, although there was no evidence that the person had become reinfected. They found it in the connective tissue where immune cells are located, suggesting that the viral fragments were causing the immune system to attack. In some of the samples, the researchers found that the virus could be active.

Peluso said more research is needed to determine whether the persistence of these fragments drives long COVID and such associated risks as heart attack and stroke.

But, based on these findings, Pelusos team at UCSF is involved in multiple clinical trials that are testing whether monoclonal antibodies or antiviral drugs can remove the virus and improve the health of people with long COVID.

There is a lot more work to be done, but I feel like we are making progress in really understanding the long-term consequences of this infection, Peluso said.

Authors: Additional UCSF co-authors include Sarah Goldberg, MAS, Brian H. LaFranchi, Scott Lu, MD, Thomas Dalhuisen, MS, Badri Viswanathan, Ma Somsouk, MD, MAS, J.D. Kelly, MD, Steven G. Deeks, MD, Zoltan Laszik, MD, PhD, Jeffrey Martin, MD, MPH, and Timothy J. Henrich, MD.

Funding: The studies were supported by funding from the PolyBio Research Foundation to support UCSFs Long-Term Impact of Infection with Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) Clinical Core and a Merck Investigator Studies Program Grant. The National Institute of Healths National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases also provided funding (3R01AI1411003-03S1, R01AI158013 and K23AI134327, K23AI157875 and K24AI145806). Additional support came from the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital Department of Medicine and Division of HIV, Infectious Diseases and Global Medicine.

See the original post:

COVID-19 Virus Can Stay in the Body More Than a Year after Infection - UC San Francisco

courier-journal.com wants to ensure the best experience for all of our readers, so we built our site to take advantage of the latest technology, making it faster and easier to use.

Unfortunately, your browser is not supported. Please download one of these browsers for the best experience on courier-journal.com

Follow this link:

COVID-19 denialism is a threat to public health. - Courier Journal

northjersey.com wants to ensure the best experience for all of our readers, so we built our site to take advantage of the latest technology, making it faster and easier to use.

Unfortunately, your browser is not supported. Please download one of these browsers for the best experience on northjersey.com

Here is the original post:

NJ COVID-19 review should lead to similar audit for US - NorthJersey.com